IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 04TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2019 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K N PHANEENDRA CRIMINAL PETITION NO.8064 OF 2019 BETWEEN:
K.N.CHIKKARANGAIAH, S/O. NAGARAJ, AGED ABOUT 20 YEARS, R/AT NO.669, MALLEPALYA, KRS AGRAHARA, KUNIGAL TOWN, KUNIGAL - 572130. ...PETITIONER (BY SRI RAKSHITH R, ADVOCATE FOR SHANKARAPPA S, ADVOCATE) AND:
STATE OF KARNATAKA BY CYBER CRIME P.S. REP BY HGCP HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, AMBEDKAR VEEDHI, BANGALORE-01. …RESPONDENT (BY SRI ROHITH B J, HCGP) **** THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 438 OF THE CR.P.C. PRAYING TO ENLARGE THE PETITIONER ON BAIL IN THE EVENT OF HIS ARREST IN CR.NO.1751/2019 REGISTERED BY CYBER CRIME POLICE STATION, BENGALURU FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S 66(c) AND 66(d) OF I.T. ACT AND SECTION 419 AND 420 OF IPC AND ETC., THIS CRIMINAL PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER The petitioner is arraigned as accused No.1 in Crime No.1751/2019 of Cyber Crime Police Station, Bengaluru, for the offence punishable under Sections 420, 419 of IPC and Section 66(c) and (d) of Information Technology Act, 2000.
2. The brief facts of the case are that the complainant by name Jayashankar has lodged a complaint on 13.3.2019 stating that in the month of August, 2019 his friend by name Raghu told him that there is a vehicle tender and in fact he can get that tender to the complainant. He in fact introduced one Mr. Smaran and he told that they require eight vehicles and tender has already been floated and they will pay an amount of Rs.17/- per kilo meter. Then the complainant told that he is not having any vehicle in his name, then the said person told that it is not necessary they will look after all these things. They told that the complainant has to provide five vehicles and the said Smaran told that he will arrange for three vehicles by telling somebody. On 19.08.2018 the complainant has provided vehicle details and also taken a tender fees of Rs.27,000/-. The same was paid by the complainant. Thereafter, they told that he did not pay any amount more. But again on 3.9.2018 they asked for EMD payment in a sum of Rs.24,650/- per vehicle. again he paid the said amount to the tune of Rs.1,21,000/- and on their insistence he also kept Rs.1,50,000/- in Fixed Deposit. Again on 18.09.2018 on demand he paid Rs.1,28,000/-. On 10.10.2018 they have asked another five vehicles and to pay EMD amount, etc., Again he has deposited a sum of Rs.1,69,000/- on 16.10.2018 and Rs.70,000/- on 17.10.2018 etc., Again on several dates he paid an amount of Rs.1,90,000/-, totally he has paid lot of money, but the tender has not been given to him and money has also not been given to him. But on the other hand they have told that they have suffered loss etc., When the complainant told them that he would lodge a complaint, then they threatened him with dire consequences. On the above said allegations a complaint came to be lodged. But what is the role that has been assigned to the petitioner is not stated specifically in the said complaint. It is only stated that the accused has threatened the petitioner that he has taken the photographs from Google and on the basis of that they are threatening them with dire consequences, etc., 3. The above said facts and circumstances disclose that it is only a financial transaction that has been taken place between the parties. The main allegations are against one Mr. Smaran and Raghu. Therefore, in my opinion, there is no specific role assigned to the petitioner. The petitioner is entitled to be enlarged on bail, subject to certain conditions as the offences are not punishable either with death or imprisonment for life. Hence, the following order.
4. The petition is allowed. Consequently, the petitioner shall be released on bail in the event of his arrest in connection with Crime No.1751/2019 of Cyber Crime Police Station, subject to the following conditions. Hence the following :
ORDER i) The petitioner shall surrender himself before the Investigating Officer within Ten days from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order and shall execute personal bond for a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh only) with one surety for the like-sum to the satisfaction of the concerned Investigating Officer.
ii) The petitioner shall not indulge in hampering the investigation or tampering the prosecution witnesses.
iii) The petitioner shall co-operate with the Investigating Officer to complete the investigation, and he shall appear before the Investigating Officer as and when called for.
iv) The petitioner shall not leave the jurisdiction of the Investigating Officer without prior permission, till the charge sheet is filed or for a period of three months whichever is earlier.
v) The petitioner shall mark his attendance once in a week i.e., on every Sunday between 10.00 am and 5.00 pm., before the Investigating Officer for a period of two months or till the charge sheet is filed, whichever is earlier.
Sd/-
JUDGE ykl